What is the relationship between law and ethics?

This is an essay question. Describe the relationship between law and ethics, and speculate as to why they are lumped together at yahoo answers. Compare and contrast, if it helps your argument, but I'm more interested in the _relationship_ between them than their similarities and differences, or in simple definitions.

Law is backed by the power of the state to compel, to punish and coerce compensation of loss

Ethics are principles of conduct which cultures generally agree upon ... there is no state coercion involved if you don't behave in accordance with the standards

There appears to be some convergence: a lawyer who violates the Code of Ethics could be sanctioned in one way or another; but this is really law, not ethics no matter what they call it ... the board of law examiners is invested (by law) with discretionary power to discipline lawyers ... same goes for other licensed professions

Laws are to maintain an order in society, and are not always based on ethics.

You will find throughout life that one's personal ethics are either in conflict with, or are set at a standard above, the "laws" of the land. This is not unusual at all.

What would make sense to me is that laws are based on ethics.

The law is the written agreement that we have as a society that dictates appropriate and acceptable conduct we display toward each other. It is the foundation of our society and can only exist as an entity and rule if we all agree to abide and maintain its very existence.

The motivating force behind our agreement to follow the law is our understanding and assent to the concept that those we empower to enforce, execute and administrate the law will do so in a manner that is true and honest and unemotional in its delivery i.e. in an ethical fashion.

Without an ethical delivery the law becomes a weapon and tool for deceit and treachery toward the very society the law was designed to protect and enhance.

Laws originate as ideas of what would be ethical conduct in society. Under this theory, breaking the law is inherently unethical. But we have seen that sometimes breaking the law is a necessary evil (i.e. MLK in the 1960's). So society's idea of what's ethical may evolve quicker than the laws, making it occasionally ethical to break laws (i.e. Jim Crow laws). The question in that context is: is it ethical to NOT break the law, as violating the unethical law brings attention to that law, possibly leading to that law being changed.

some people need laws to make them socialy acceptable ( mandatory guidelines) some people are just more ethical than others(voluntary guidelines) if a person isnt taught the difference between right and wrong by role models,parents ,schools or church's will this person be an ethical adult or will they need laws to guide their actions?